|Publication number||US5578229 A|
|Application number||US 08/325,671|
|Publication date||Nov 26, 1996|
|Filing date||Oct 18, 1994|
|Priority date||Oct 18, 1994|
|Also published as||CA2160743A1|
|Publication number||08325671, 325671, US 5578229 A, US 5578229A, US-A-5578229, US5578229 A, US5578229A|
|Inventors||Vladmir Barnekov, Henry A. Huber, Kalinath Mukherjee|
|Original Assignee||Michigan State University|
|Export Citation||BiBTeX, EndNote, RefMan|
|Patent Citations (15), Non-Patent Citations (58), Referenced by (44), Classifications (18), Legal Events (5)|
|External Links: USPTO, USPTO Assignment, Espacenet|
The present invention relates to laser cutting of lumber or wooden boards.
Concurrently using two or more laser beams to cut a workpiece, such as lumber or wood, is known. For example, U.S. Pat. No. 4,943,700 to Hughes et al. suggests applying a first laser beam "pre-pulse" of a few nanoseconds to a surface of a log to generate a line plasma. Subsequently, a high powered laser beam is directed upon the plasma, self-focusing the laser beam along a plane and producing a hairline cut through the log. It is suggested that the log be cut from opposing sides.
Another example is U.S. Pat. No. 4,689,467 to Inoue which discloses a laser machining apparatus. An auxiliary energy source, such as a secondary laser or plasma generator, is used to condition or preheat a material which is subsequently cut by a powerful primary laser beam. If a workpiece is sufficiently thin, the secondary heating source can be applied to the side opposite the primary laser beam. However, only one laser beam is used to cut or machine a workpiece.
Further, U.S. Pat. No. 4,625,093 to Chryssolouris shows a combination of two laser beams cutting a workpiece. The laser beams are directed along non-coaxial axes to produce intersecting kerfs. The workpiece is moved relative to the laser beams to produce a separate solid removable portion from the workpiece.
However, these systems of cutting wood or workpieces have drawbacks. The high-powered self-focusing laser beam of the '700 patent produces only a very narrow hairline cut with the high powered cutting laser beam remaining substantially non-divergent. While this allegedly allows deep penetration through relatively thick workpieces, the laser beam exiting from the cut workpiece remains focused and powerful. Therefore, the concentrated beam is capable of damaging other downstream structures such as an opposing laser or support structure. Further, the high-powered laser beam is sufficiently powerful that it is recommended that the cutting operation be performed within an evacuated safety enclosure to protect against laser beam ionization of the air and to protect personnel. Moreover, this system is complex in that it requires a first laser beam which creates a plasma upon which a second laser beam is directed so as to be self-focusing. Also, with a laser beam as powerful as the one suggested in the '700 patent, substantial efficiency losses occur due to the high power of lasers involved. Finally, difficulties in over-heating lenses often occur when laser beams of the suggested high power are focussed through such lenses.
The laser cutting system of the '467 patent teaches cutting a workpiece from only a single side. Hence, this system is relatively slow in cutting a workpiece. Also, the system works poorly where the material to be cut has a low thermal conductivity, such as wood.
The laser cutting of the '093 patent uses intersecting, non-coincident laser beams for cutting or slicing thin sections from a large workpiece. This system does not use beams which are coincident to cut through a workpiece from both sides to produce a through-thickness rip and/or cross-cut.
The present invention is intended to overcome the shortcomings of the laser cutting systems described in the above patents.
It is an object of the present invention to provide a method and laser cutting system in which laser beams are directed through respective lenses converging at focal points located between two parallel surfaces of a wooden board to be cut. The laser beams then exit the board and diverge sufficiently to reduce their intensity thereby preventing damage downstream of the board to components of the laser cutting system.
It is another object to maximize the speed at which a board can be cut to produce a through-thickness rip or cross-cut using a laser beam cutting system of a given power.
It is yet another object to provide a method and system for laser cutting using a pair of opposing laser beams to produce a pair of generally co-planar kerfs extending from opposite parallel surfaces of a board wherein the overall combined kerf width is reduced as compared to using a conventional single laser beam for cutting.
Still a further object is to cut through a board from opposing sides to reduce the depth of the pathway of smoke and debris each laser beam must pass through.
It is an additional object to provide an apparatus and method wherein boards of a predetermined thickness are cut using a pair of laser beams and converging lenses of differing focal lengths or cone angles to optimize cutting speed.
A method and a laser cutting system for laser cutting a secondary piece from a primary wooden board is disclosed. The primary board is provided having generally planar first and second surfaces separated by a predetermined distance and having a central plane located midway between the planar first and second surfaces. A first focusing lens is located relative to the primary board with the focal point of the first lens locating intermediate the first and second surfaces of the workpiece. A second focusing lens is arranged on the opposite side of the primary board with the focal point of the second lens also locating intermediate the first and second surfaces of the primary board.
A first laser beam is focused through the first lens to converge the first laser beam upon the first focal point and then diverge the first laser beam with the first laser beam cutting the primary board from the first surface toward the second surface. A second laser beam is applied to the second lens to converge the second laser beam upon the second focal point and then diverge the second laser beam with the second laser beam cutting the workpiece from the second surface toward the first surface. The first and second laser beams, after passing through the lenses, are generally coaxially aligned with respect to one another to produce adjoining congruent kerfs through the thickness of the primary board to form a single cut through the board. The primary board and laser beams are moved relative to one another to create an elongate cut pathway resulting in a secondary piece being cut from the primary board.
The focal lengths of the first and second lenses may be asymmetric or not equal. Likewise, differing cone angles on the converging laser beams are desirable. Further, preferably, the laser beam with the smaller cone angle produces a deeper kerf than the opposing laser beam. Tests have shown an advantageous cutting speed can be attained by using asymmetric cone angles or focal lengths.
These and other features, objects, and advantages of the present invention will become readily apparent from the following description, pending claims, and accompanying sheets of drawings where:
FIG. 1 is an overall schematic view of a laser cutting system for boards made in accordance with the present invention;
FIG. 2 is a schematic view of secondary pieces to be cut from a primary board, defects noted on the primary board, and an optimized cutting path to be followed;
FIG. 3a and 3b are schematic views respectively showing a board supported upon a movable mount for relative movement with respect to a pair of stationary laser beams and translatable lasers and lenses which are movable relative to a fixed board;
FIG. 4 is a schematic view showing opposing convergent laser beams cutting through a board utilizing lenses having approximately equal focal lengths and cone angles;
FIG. 5 is a schematic view showing opposing convergent laser beams cutting through a board utilizing lenses having differing focal lengths and cone angles; and
FIGS. 6a and 6b are cross-sectional views showing kerfs respectively produced by a single laser beam and by a pair of opposing convergent laser beams.
A laser cutting system 10 for boards, made in accordance with the present invention, is shown in FIG. 1. System 10 includes a computer 12, a camera 14, lasers 16 and 18, a pair of focusing lenses 22 and 24 and a movable support 26 for moving a workpiece, such as a one-inch thick wood board 32, relative to lenses 22 and 24. Lasers 16 and 18 produce laser beams 20 and 21, respectively. Motors 28 and 30 are used translate support 26 and board 32 along orthogonal axes as indicated by the arrows. This combination of translations can be used to make curved cuts as well as straight cuts. Support 26 is a schematically illustrated movable support such as a conventional X-Y table or frame for holding the periphery of board 32.
In the preferred embodiments, lasers 16 and 18 are CO2 continuously working lasers producing light on the order of 10.6 μm in wavelength. Other commercially available lasers such as Nd-YAG or Eximer may also be used. Alternatively, a single laser could be used with a beam splitter and mirrors to produce laser beams 20 and 21. However, by using two separate lasers 16 and 18 lower powered lasers can be used. The laser beams may be continuously applied. Alternatively, delays between 5 to 10 milliseconds may be used between turning on and off first and second laser 16 and 18.
In the preferred embodiments, each of laser beams 20 and 21 has about 1300 watts of power. Of course, laser beams of other strengths could also be used. Lasers producing more powerful beams are generally less energy efficient. Further, using more powerful laser beams can result in overheating of the lenses due to excessive energy absorption.
Lenses 22 and 24 in the preferred embodiment are respective ZN SE (zinc selenide) transmittive lenses available from Laser Machining of Somerset, Wis. Alternatively, equivalent refelective mirrors could be used to focus the laser beams rather than the transmittive lenses. The cone angle (α) is calculated by the formula: ##EQU1## Lens 22 has a focal length FL of 7.5 inches and an outer diameter of 2.0 inches. Lens 24 has a 10 inch focal length and an outer diameter of 2.0". Ideally, the range of focal lengths could vary from 3-12 inches or more. Preferably, the cone angles of α range from 4° to 8°.
Wooden plank or board 30 typically contains defects 34a-g such as cracks or knots which are undesirable in certain constructions such as furniture. Camera 14 scans board 32 noting the size and location of the defects 34a-g. This information is conveyed to computer 12. Computer 12 calculates the size of individual defect free pieces 36a-f which can be cut from board 32 utilizing an optimization algorithm. In this case, the selection of particular sizes of pieces 36a-f is dependent upon the size and location of the defects 34 as well as the particular need for pieces of certain sizes. General optimization algorithms are well known as is described in a paper entitled, ALPS (Automated Lumber Processing System):yield optimization cutting program, in FOREST PRODUCT JOURNAL, Vol. 39, No. 3., March, 1989.
Rather than using an integral board 30, a composite board made from individual pieces is glued together. Then, the composite board can be scanned for defects. If properly glued together, the glue joints will not act as defects nor are these joints recognized as being defects. This method replaces the conventional method of cutting clear or defect-free portions from a board and then gluing the defect-free pieces together.
Blower or vacuum units 38 and 40 are disposed on either side of board 32 to evacuate smoke and debris as cutting occurs to reduce degradation of laser beam intensity due to light scattering from the smoke and debris produced in the cutting or ablation operation. By evacuating smoke and debris from both sides of board 30, cutting speed is enhanced over using a single blower unit.
FIG. 2 illustrates a sample output, not to scale, calculated by computer 12 of the defect free pieces 36a-f and defects 34. Also, an optimized cutting path 42 is calculated which requires the minimum travel, and hence, the least required cutting, by laser cutting system 10. Computer 12 then turns lasers 16 and 18 on and off producing laser beams 20 and 21 as needed to create cutting path 42.
Lasers 16 and 18 and lenses 22 and 24 are mounted to fixed supports, schematically shown in FIGS. 1. Movable support 26 moves the board 32 relative to lenses 22 and 24 and laser beams 20 and 21. Alternatively, board 30 could be stationary with lasers 16 and 18 and lenses 22 and 24 being mounted on movable supports whose movement is controlled by computer 12 to achieve the desired cutting path 42 and resultant cut pieces 36a-f. These alternative embodiments are schematically illustrated in FIGS. 3a and 3b with arrows indicating the movement of components.
Alternative embodiments of the placement of lenses 22 and 24 relative to board 32 is shown in FIGS. 4 and 5. Ideally, lenses 22 and 24 have a focal lengths FL1 and FL2 ranging between 3-12 inches. The preferred range of cone angles is between 4°-8°. In the embodiment of FIG. 4, lenses 22 and 24 are identical and are symmetric about board 32 with 7.5 inch focal lengths and cone angles of between 4°-8°. In FIG. 5, lenses 22 and 24 have differing focal lengths, 7.5 and 10 inches respectively, with cone angles also between 4°-8°. In either embodiment, beams 20 and 21 are preferably substantially coaxially aligned. The coaxially alignment assists in making sharp curved cuts.
Looking now to FIG. 4, board 32 has two generally planar surfaces 44 and 46 separated by a distance or thickness t. A central plane 48 lies midway between planar surfaces 44 and 46. Converging laser beams 20 and 21 arrive at focal points Fp1 and Fp2 located between central plane 46 and the respective adjacent planar surfaces 44 and 46 in zones Z1 and Z2.
FIGS. 6a and 6b show respective kerfs produced by a conventional single laser beam cutting system and that produced by a pair of non-symmetric opposing laser beams of the present invention. The kerfs are not to scale, but are for illustration purposes only.
In FIG. 6a, a single beam, passing in the direction of the arrow first creates a kerf portion K1C as the beam converges and a kerf portion K1D as the beam diverges to cut through the board producing an overall kerf K1. δ1, or the depth of Fp1, is 1/3t for the single beam cutting.
FIG. 6b shows kerfs K1 and K2 produced by opposing laser beams 20 and 21 propagating in the direction of arrows 1 and 2 respectively. Kerf K1 is produced by beam 20 as it converges and diverges to produce kerf portions K1C and K1D. Similarly, kerf K2 is created by beam 21 with kerf portions K2C and K2D. Kerfs K1 and K2 adjoin one another to produce a through cut in board 32.
The beams travelling along arrow 1 of FIG. 6a and arrow 2 of FIG. 6b have generally equal cone angles. The beam travelling along arrow 1 of FIG. 6b, or beam 20, has a larger cone angle, i.e. α1 >α2. Note that while kerfs K1 and K2 are only illustrative, and are in fact much more contoured and non-planar, FIGS. 6a and 6b do suggest that using opposing beams, as compared to using a single beam to cut boards, will result in a smaller or narrower kerf being cut.
The focal points Fp1 and Fp2 of each of lenses 22 and 24 in FIGS. 4 and 5 ideally are located between the central plane 48 and the their respective proximate or adjacent planar surface 44 or 46. The position chosen within these limits will affect the quality of the cut and size of kerf, but not generally the speed of cutting. Most preferably, with the symmetric 7.5" focal length for each of lenses 22 and 24, the focal points Fp1 and Fp2 will be located a distance δ1 =δ2 =1/6t to 1/4t inboard from the respective surfaces 44 and 46. However, δ1 =δ2 can range from 0t to 1/2t. With asymmetric lenses, i.e., 7.5" and 10", the focal point Fp1 of the 7.5" lens is also ideally δ1 =1/6t to 1/4t inboard from surface 44 and focal point Fp2 of the 10" lens is preferably δ2 =1/6t to 1/4t inboard from surface 46. The overall range of δ1 and δ2 may be from 0 to 1/2t and 0 to 1/2t, respectively. In actual tests conducted, δ1 =δ2 =1/5t.
The tests were run under various conditions to ascertain optimal combinations of power, speed, and focal length. The results are displayed below.
TABLE I__________________________________________________________________________CUTTING SPEED VERSUS POWER SPEED OF CUTTING (Inches Per Minute) Conventional Double Beam Single Beam Laser Power/WattsBoard Thickness Power/Watts 2 × 600 2 × 900 2 × 1300Oak Kiln Dried 7% 1200 1800 2600 Symm. Asymm. Symm. Asymm. Symm. Asymm.__________________________________________________________________________1/2" 130 220 300 180 200 300 330 400 4403/4" 60 100 180 80 100 140 170 240 2701" 30 50 110 40 60 70 90 160 190__________________________________________________________________________
In the test, oak boards dried to 7% moisture, of varying thicknesses, i.e. 1/2", 3/4" and 1", were cut. Lasers of varying power, 1200, 1800 and 2600 watts, respectively, were used to cut boards. First, a single laser beam was applied to only one side of the board in a conventional single laser beam cutting system. The focal point of the laser beam was δ1 =1/3t, as shown in FIG. 6a. Next, two opposing laser beams, each having half the power of a corresponding single laser beam, was applied to lenses 22 and 24 with the symmetric focal length of 7.5 inches. Finally, two opposing laser beams, again each having half the power of a corresponding single beam, were used with asymmetric lenses of 7.5" and 10" focal lengths. The focal points Fp1 and Fp2 of δ1 =1/5t and δ2 =1/5t were used. A determination was made as to the maximum speed at which the laser beams could cut the boards. Of course, the more powerful the beam and the thinner the board, the faster the permissible cutting speed.
The results show that for a given power laser, using opposing laser beams provides an increased cutting speed ever using a single beam of the same total power. Somewhat surprisingly, using the asymmetric lens configuration of FIG. 5 resulted in increased cutting speed over using the symmetric lens arrangement of FIG. 4.
For example, with a 1" thick oak board and two opposing 1300 watt laser beams, a speed of 160 inches per minute was achieved with the symmetric 7.5" lenses. However, using asymmetric lenses, i.e. 7.5" and 10" focal lengths, a speed of 190 inches per minute was attained. Cutting the board from one side using only a single 2600 watt laser beam achieved only a 110 inch per minute cutting speed.
The present invention offers significant advances over prior laser board cutting systems. Cutting boards using opposing, convergent laser beams provide for greater cutting speed utilizing a given power as compared to conventional single laser beam cutting. Smoke and debris can be evacuated from both sides of a board being cut. The distance or depth each individual laser beam must cut through is reduced. Also, the overall kerf size and width can be reduced as compared to using a single beam. This results in a greater yield of uncut board material after the laser cutting has been performed.
It is hypothesized that using asymmetrical cone angles or focal lengths, which result in different cutting depths, may enhance cutting speed by providing an "exhaust port" on the shorter cut depth side for the debris produced by the laser beam creating the deeper cut. In contrast, with two balanced depth cuts, there is no driving imbalance to create a self-evacuating kerf. In any event, test results have shown that using asymmetric cone angles or focal lengths can lead to enhanced cutting speeds.
While the foregoing specification of this invention has been described in relation to certain preferred embodiments thereof, and many details have been set forth for purpose of illustration, it will be apparent to those skilled in the art that the invention is susceptible to additional embodiments and that certain of the details described herein can be varied considerably without departing from the basic principles of the invention.
|Cited Patent||Filing date||Publication date||Applicant||Title|
|US3610871 *||Feb 19, 1970||Oct 5, 1971||Western Electric Co||Initiation of a controlled fracture|
|US3679863 *||Nov 10, 1969||Jul 25, 1972||Nat Res Dev||Thermal cutting apparatus|
|US4469931 *||Sep 13, 1982||Sep 4, 1984||Macken John A||Laser assisted saw device|
|US4491463 *||Jul 26, 1983||Jan 1, 1985||Olin Corporation||Laser sizing method and apparatus for fiber optic buffers|
|US4625093 *||Jan 24, 1986||Nov 25, 1986||Massachusetts Institute Of Technology||Stock removal by laser cutting|
|US4642439 *||Jan 3, 1985||Feb 10, 1987||Dow Corning Corporation||Method and apparatus for edge contouring lenses|
|US4689467 *||Dec 17, 1983||Aug 25, 1987||Inoue-Japax Research Incorporated||Laser machining apparatus|
|US4751365 *||May 22, 1987||Jun 14, 1988||Fiat Auto S.P.A.||Method for butt welding two pieces of different metal, particularly pieces of medium or high carbon content steel, with a laser beam|
|US4761535 *||Oct 13, 1987||Aug 2, 1988||Laser Machining, Inc.||Laser wire stripper|
|US4943700 *||Oct 31, 1988||Jul 24, 1990||Austral Asian Lasers Pty. Ltd.||Laser sawmill|
|US5108669 *||Jun 15, 1989||Apr 28, 1992||Wavin B.V.||Process and apparatus perforating tubular plastic foil with a laser beam|
|US5367929 *||Jul 13, 1993||Nov 29, 1994||The Laitram Corporation||Fluid jet cutting knife apparatus|
|US5521352 *||Sep 23, 1993||May 28, 1996||Laser Machining, Inc.||Laser cutting apparatus|
|JPS5930494A *||Title not available|
|JPS59212185A *||Title not available|
|1||"A Comparative Economic Analysis of Automated and Conventional Hardwood Lumber Processing Systems", Manetsch and Huber, Forest Products Journal, vol. 43, No. 1, pp. 35-40, Jan., 1993.|
|2||"A Comparison of Two Roughmill Cutting Models", Ruddell, et al, Forest Products Journal, vol. 40, No. 5, pp. 27-29, May, 1990.|
|3||"A Machine Vision System to Examine Hardwood Lumber", Richard W. Conners, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA 24061, Advanced Wood Processing, pp. 51-52.|
|4||"A Study of the Mechanism of Laser Cutting of Wood", Li and Mazumder, Advanced Wood Processing, pp. 39-48.|
|5||"Acoustic Emission as a Control Parameter in Red Oak Drying-Final Report", Zalph, et al, Advanced Wood Processing, pp. 59-63.|
|6||"ALPS: Yield Optimization Cutting Program", Klinkhachorn, et al Forest Products Journal, vol. 39, No. 3, pp. 53-56, Mar., 1989.|
|7||"An Economic and System Analysis of the Automated Hardwood Lumber Processing System (ALPS)", Manetsch and Huber, Forest Products Journal, vol. 42, No. 3, pp. 51-56 Mar., 1992.|
|8||"Analysis of Combustion Gases Associated With Laser Cutting of Wood", Kali Mukherjee, et al, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI Advanced Wood Processing, pp. 37-38.|
|9||"Design of a Materials Handling System for the Advanced Lumber Processing System" Weidhaas, et al, Advanced Lumber Processing, pp. 53-54.|
|10||"Development of a Prototype System to Demonstrate the ALPS Concept: A Modified Vision System Approach", Powsiri Klinkhachorn, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV Advanced Wood Processing, pp. 49-50.|
|11||"Economic Analysis of ALPS, etc." Huber and Manetsch, Advanced Wood Processing, pp. 25-26.|
|12||"Economics of Cutting Hardwood Dimension Parts with an Automated System", Huber, et al Forest Products Journal, vol. 39, No. 5, pp. 46-50, May, 1989.|
|13||"Economics of Cutting Wood Parts with a Laser Under Optical Image Analyzer Control", Forest Products Journal, vol. 32, No. 3, pp. 16-21, Mar., 1992.|
|14||"Enhancement of the Computer Lumber Grading Program to Support Polygonal Defects", Forest Products Journal, vol. 42, No. 10, pp. 41-46, Oct., 1992.|
|15||"Factors Influencing Laser Cutting of Wood", Barnekov, et al Forest Products Journal vol. 36, No. 1, pp. 55-58, Jan., 1986.|
|16||"Gluebond Strength of Laser Cut Wood", McMillin and Huber, Forest Products Journal, vol. 35, No. 1, pp. 23-25, Jan., 1985.|
|17||"Industry Standards for Recognition of Marginal Wood Defects", Huber, et al, Forest Products Journal, vol. 40, No. 3, pp. 30-34, Mar., 1990.|
|18||"Laser Cut Furniture Parts", Henry A. Huber, Woodworking & Furniture Digest Nov., 1980, pp. 30-31.|
|19||"Laser Power and Feed Speed in Cutting Wood", Mukerjee and Khan, Advanced Wood Processing, pp. 33-36.|
|20||"Optimizing Glue-Line Strength of Laser-Cut Hardwoods", Rabiej and Behm, Advanced Lumber Processing, pp. 54-56.|
|21||"Optimizing Glue-Line Strength of Laser-Cut Hardwoods: Phase II", Rabiej and Behm, Advanced Lumber Processing, pp. 57-58.|
|22||"Overview of Progress and Development of the ALPS", Huber, 2nd International Conference on Automated Lumber Processing.|
|23||"Prototyping an Automated Lumber Processing System", Klinkhachorn, et al, Forest Products Journal, vol. 43, No. 2, pp. 11-18, Feb., 1993.|
|24||"Safety Costs in Hardwood Dimension and Furniture Part Processing From Rough Lumber", Huber and Mukherjee, Advanced Wood Processing, pp. 27-29.|
|25||"Yield Comparisons of Conventional and Laser CNC Cutting of Hardwood Dimension Parts from Rough Lumber", Huber and Klinkachorn, Advanced Wood Processing, pp. 30-32.|
|26||"Yield Comparisons of Conventional and Laser CNC Cutting of Hardwood Dimension Parts from Rough Lumber", Huber, et al, Advanced Wood Processing 1993 Annual Report, pp. 31-60.|
|27||*||A Comparative Economic Analysis of Automated and Conventional Hardwood Lumber Processing Systems , Manetsch and Huber, Forest Products Journal, vol. 43, No. 1, pp. 35 40, Jan., 1993.|
|28||*||A Comparison of Two Roughmill Cutting Models , Ruddell, et al, Forest Products Journal, vol. 40, No. 5, pp. 27 29, May, 1990.|
|29||*||A Machine Vision System to Examine Hardwood Lumber , Richard W. Conners, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA 24061, Advanced Wood Processing, pp. 51 52.|
|30||*||A Study of the Mechanism of Laser Cutting of Wood , Li and Mazumder, Advanced Wood Processing, pp. 39 48.|
|31||*||Acoustic Emission as a Control Parameter in Red Oak Drying Final Report , Zalph, et al, Advanced Wood Processing, pp. 59 63.|
|32||*||Advanced Technology Applications to Eastern Hardwood Utilization Excerpt: Advanced Wood Processing, Progress Report 5, 1992, Dept. of Forestry Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan.|
|33||*||Advanced Technology Applications to Eastern Hardwood Utilization Excerpted from: Progress Report 6, 1993, Dept. of Forestry, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan.|
|34||Advanced Technology Applications to Eastern Hardwood Utilization--Excerpt: Advanced Wood Processing, Progress Report #5, 1992, Dept. of Forestry Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan.|
|35||Advanced Technology Applications to Eastern Hardwood Utilization--Excerpted from: Progress Report #6, 1993, Dept. of Forestry, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan.|
|36||*||ALPS: Yield Optimization Cutting Program , Klinkhachorn, et al Forest Products Journal, vol. 39, No. 3, pp. 53 56, Mar., 1989.|
|37||*||An Economic and System Analysis of the Automated Hardwood Lumber Processing System (ALPS) , Manetsch and Huber, Forest Products Journal, vol. 42, No. 3, pp. 51 56 Mar., 1992.|
|38||*||Analysis of Combustion Gases Associated With Laser Cutting of Wood , Kali Mukherjee, et al, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI Advanced Wood Processing, pp. 37 38.|
|39||Brochure from FDM (Furniture Design & Manufacturing) "Laser Machining of Wood at Michigan State University", Jul., 1992.|
|40||*||Brochure from FDM (Furniture Design & Manufacturing) Laser Machining of Wood at Michigan State University , Jul., 1992.|
|41||*||Design of a Materials Handling System for the Advanced Lumber Processing System Weidhaas, et al, Advanced Lumber Processing, pp. 53 54.|
|42||*||Development of a Prototype System to Demonstrate the ALPS Concept: A Modified Vision System Approach , Powsiri Klinkhachorn, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV Advanced Wood Processing, pp. 49 50.|
|43||*||Economic Analysis of ALPS, etc. Huber and Manetsch, Advanced Wood Processing, pp. 25 26.|
|44||*||Economics of Cutting Hardwood Dimension Parts with an Automated System , Huber, et al Forest Products Journal, vol. 39, No. 5, pp. 46 50, May, 1989.|
|45||*||Economics of Cutting Wood Parts with a Laser Under Optical Image Analyzer Control , Forest Products Journal, vol. 32, No. 3, pp. 16 21, Mar., 1992.|
|46||*||Enhancement of the Computer Lumber Grading Program to Support Polygonal Defects , Forest Products Journal, vol. 42, No. 10, pp. 41 46, Oct., 1992.|
|47||*||Factors Influencing Laser Cutting of Wood , Barnekov, et al Forest Products Journal vol. 36, No. 1, pp. 55 58, Jan., 1986.|
|48||*||Gluebond Strength of Laser Cut Wood , McMillin and Huber, Forest Products Journal, vol. 35, No. 1, pp. 23 25, Jan., 1985.|
|49||*||Industry Standards for Recognition of Marginal Wood Defects , Huber, et al, Forest Products Journal, vol. 40, No. 3, pp. 30 34, Mar., 1990.|
|50||*||Laser Cut Furniture Parts , Henry A. Huber, Woodworking & Furniture Digest Nov., 1980, pp. 30 31.|
|51||*||Laser Power and Feed Speed in Cutting Wood , Mukerjee and Khan, Advanced Wood Processing, pp. 33 36.|
|52||*||Optimizing Glue Line Strength of Laser Cut Hardwoods , Rabiej and Behm, Advanced Lumber Processing, pp. 54 56.|
|53||*||Optimizing Glue Line Strength of Laser Cut Hardwoods: Phase II , Rabiej and Behm, Advanced Lumber Processing, pp. 57 58.|
|54||*||Overview of Progress and Development of the ALPS , Huber, 2nd International Conference on Automated Lumber Processing.|
|55||*||Prototyping an Automated Lumber Processing System , Klinkhachorn, et al, Forest Products Journal, vol. 43, No. 2, pp. 11 18, Feb., 1993.|
|56||*||Safety Costs in Hardwood Dimension and Furniture Part Processing From Rough Lumber , Huber and Mukherjee, Advanced Wood Processing, pp. 27 29.|
|57||*||Yield Comparisons of Conventional and Laser CNC Cutting of Hardwood Dimension Parts from Rough Lumber , Huber and Klinkachorn, Advanced Wood Processing, pp. 30 32.|
|58||*||Yield Comparisons of Conventional and Laser CNC Cutting of Hardwood Dimension Parts from Rough Lumber , Huber, et al, Advanced Wood Processing 1993 Annual Report, pp. 31 60.|
|Citing Patent||Filing date||Publication date||Applicant||Title|
|US6251328 *||Apr 24, 1996||Jun 26, 2001||Fraunhofer-Gesellshcaft Zur Foerderung Der Angewandten Forschung E.V.||Device and process for shaping workpieces with laser diode radiation|
|US6294757||Apr 7, 2000||Sep 25, 2001||Clive G. Whittenbury||Laser-assisted cutting method|
|US6476347||Apr 7, 2000||Nov 5, 2002||Clive G. Whittenbury||Laser-assisted cutting device|
|US6476350 *||Jul 17, 1998||Nov 5, 2002||Commissariat A L'energie Atomique||Device and method for extended distance cutting by laser, in pulse mode|
|US6563082 *||Sep 14, 2001||May 13, 2003||Seiko Epson Corporation||Laser cutting method, laser cutting apparatus, and method and apparatus for manufacturing liquid crystal device|
|US6576870 *||Sep 5, 2001||Jun 10, 2003||Hannstar Display Corp.||Apparatus with double laser beams for cutting two bonded glass substrates and method thereof|
|US6621047 *||Apr 24, 2002||Sep 16, 2003||Precitec Kg||Method and sensor device for monitoring a laser machining operation to be performed on a work piece as well as laser machining head with a sensor device of the kind|
|US6624382 *||Jun 16, 2001||Sep 23, 2003||Anvik Corporation||Configured-hole high-speed drilling system for micro-via pattern formation, and resulting structure|
|US6737605||Jan 21, 2003||May 18, 2004||Gerald L. Kern||Single and/or dual surface automatic edge sensing trimmer|
|US6759625 *||Jul 1, 1999||Jul 6, 2004||Siemens Aktiengesellschaft||Device for the laser processing of workpieces|
|US6821472||Apr 10, 2002||Nov 23, 2004||Siemens Dematic Electronics Assembly Systems, Inc.||Method of laser machining materials with minimal thermal loading|
|US6864460 *||Jul 2, 2002||Mar 8, 2005||Virtek Laser Systems, Inc.||Method of ablating an opening in a hard, non-metallic substrate|
|US6958106||Apr 9, 2003||Oct 25, 2005||Endicott International Technologies, Inc.||Material separation to form segmented product|
|US8056236 *||Feb 15, 2006||Nov 15, 2011||Flooring Industries Limited, Sarl||Method for manufacturing floor panels, as well as floor panel obtained by means of such method|
|US8082959 *||May 4, 2006||Dec 27, 2011||Berry Finance N.V.||Method of manufacturing a panel|
|US8219236||Jul 10, 2012||Abb Oy||Method for creating a cutting plan for a strip-like material|
|US8258427 *||Dec 12, 2008||Sep 4, 2012||Corning Incorporated||Laser cutting of glass along a predetermined line|
|US8591786 *||Sep 23, 2011||Nov 26, 2013||Flooring Industries Limited, Sarl||Method for manufacturing floor panels, as well as floor panel obtained by means of such method|
|US8923356||Sep 21, 2012||Dec 30, 2014||Kern Technologies, LLC.||Gas laser pre-ionization optical monitoring and compensation|
|US9263849||Dec 10, 2014||Feb 16, 2016||Gerald L Kern||Impedance matching system for slab type lasers|
|US20030006220 *||Jul 2, 2002||Jan 9, 2003||Michael Cummings||Method of ablating an opening in a hard, non-metallic substrate|
|US20030159294 *||Mar 15, 2003||Aug 28, 2003||Whittenbury Clive G.||Laser-assisted joining device|
|US20030193117 *||Apr 10, 2002||Oct 16, 2003||Schreiner Alexander F.||Method of laser machining materials with minimal thermal loading|
|US20040026389 *||Aug 5, 2003||Feb 12, 2004||Precitec Kg||Method and sensor device for monitoring a laser machining operation to be performed on a work piece as well as laser machining head with a sensor device of the kind|
|US20040195362 *||Apr 2, 2003||Oct 7, 2004||Walker Samuel C.||Rotating stream sprinkler with torque balanced reaction drive|
|US20050029240 *||Aug 9, 2004||Feb 10, 2005||Translume, Inc.||Dual light source machining method and system|
|US20050224167 *||Jun 13, 2005||Oct 13, 2005||Endicott Interconnect Technologies, Inc.||Material separation to form segmented product|
|US20080172856 *||Feb 15, 2006||Jul 24, 2008||Dries Brouckaert||Method For Manufacturing Floor Panels, as Well as Floor Panel Obtained by Means of Such Method|
|US20080288100 *||Jan 16, 2008||Nov 20, 2008||Abb Oy||Method for creating a cutting plan for a strip-like material|
|US20090101236 *||May 4, 2006||Apr 23, 2009||Eddy Boucke||Method of Manufacturing a Panel|
|US20090166343 *||Feb 23, 2007||Jul 2, 2009||Picodeon Ltd. Oy||Method for Producing Surfaces and Materials by Laser Ablation|
|US20090169871 *||Feb 23, 2007||Jul 2, 2009||Reijo Lappalainen||Method for Producing High-Quality Surfaces and a Product Having a High-Quality Surface|
|US20090176034 *||Feb 23, 2007||Jul 9, 2009||Picodeon Ltd. Oy||Surface Treatment Technique and Surface Treatment Apparatus Associated With Ablation Technology|
|US20090294420 *||Dec 3, 2009||Anatoli Anatolyevich Abramov||Laser Cutting of Glass Along A Predetermined Line|
|US20090302503 *||Feb 23, 2007||Dec 10, 2009||Picodeon Ltd Oy||Coating Method|
|US20100012227 *||Mar 30, 2009||Jan 21, 2010||Greg Zielke||Lumber processing system|
|US20100247836 *||Nov 7, 2008||Sep 30, 2010||Claus Peter Kluge||Method for the laser ablation of brittle components|
|US20120012248 *||Jan 19, 2012||Dries Brouckaert||Method for manufacturing floor panels, as well as floor panel obtained by means of such method|
|CN101236426B||Feb 1, 2008||Jun 16, 2010||Abb有限公司||A method for creating an optimal cutting plan for a strip-like material|
|EP1409192A1 *||Jul 2, 2002||Apr 21, 2004||Virtek Laser Systems, Inc.||Method of ablating an opening in a hard, non-metallic substrate|
|EP1953616A1 *||Feb 1, 2007||Aug 6, 2008||ABB Oy||A method for creating an optimal cutting plan for a strip-like material|
|EP1956456A1 *||Jan 23, 2008||Aug 13, 2008||ABB Oy||A method for creating an optimal cutting plan for a strip-like material|
|WO2000003831A1 *||Jul 1, 1999||Jan 27, 2000||Siemens Production And Logistics Systems Ag||Device for the laser processing of workpieces|
|WO2007096460A3 *||Feb 23, 2007||Mar 20, 2008||Reijo Lappalainen||Surface treatment technique and surface treatment apparatus associated with ablation technology|
|U.S. Classification||219/121.72, 219/121.67, 219/121.84, 219/121.76|
|International Classification||B23K26/40, B27M1/06, B23K26/36, B23K26/14|
|Cooperative Classification||B23K2203/36, B23K26/402, B27M1/06, B23K26/364, B23K26/142, B23K26/042|
|European Classification||B23K26/40B7E, B23K26/14A, B23K26/36E2, B27M1/06|
|Dec 9, 1994||AS||Assignment|
Owner name: MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY, MICHIGAN
Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNORS:BARNEKOV, VLADMIR;HUBER, HENRY A.;MUKHERJEE, KALINATH;REEL/FRAME:007258/0221
Effective date: 19941201
|Apr 24, 2000||FPAY||Fee payment|
Year of fee payment: 4
|Jun 16, 2004||REMI||Maintenance fee reminder mailed|
|Nov 26, 2004||LAPS||Lapse for failure to pay maintenance fees|
|Jan 25, 2005||FP||Expired due to failure to pay maintenance fee|
Effective date: 20041126